AI-generated summaries. Not legal advice. Always verify against the official judgment on NSW Caselaw.
← All decisions
District Court 3 July 2026

R v MB

[2026] NSWDC 223

Other
CRIME SENTENCING CHILD SEX OFFENCES VICTIM OFFENDER’S STEP DAUGHTER RELATIONSHIP OF OVER FIVE YEARS

Citation: R v MB [2026] NSWDC 223
Court: District Court of New South Wales
Date: 3 July 2026
Judge: Lerve DCJ

Background

The offender was the step-father of the victim, having entered her life when she was approximately 10 years old and married her mother in April 2014. He pleaded guilty on the first day of trial, after proceedings had commenced but before the complainant was cross-examined, to maintaining an unlawful sexual relationship with the victim contrary to s 66EA(1) of the Crimes Act 1900. The agreed facts described offending between 2015 and 2019, when the victim was aged approximately 11 to 15 years.

The offending was extensive and serious. It encompassed digital penetration, penile-vaginal intercourse occurring multiple times per week (amounting to hundreds of instances), penile-oral intercourse, and touching outside the vagina. The offender used threats, secrecy, and isolation to maintain control over the victim, telling her that if she disclosed what was happening he would "go away for a really long time" and she would "have nothing." He progressively controlled her movements, her clothing, her phone use, and her access to friends.

No subjective material was tendered or called on behalf of the offender at the sentencing hearing.

  • What discount was available for a plea of guilty entered on the first day of trial after proceedings had commenced?
  • Where no subjective evidence is tendered by an offender, how should the sentencing court approach objective and subjective matters?
  • What is the appropriate sentence for a serious, prolonged unlawful sexual relationship with a child maintained by a person in a position of trust, having regard to the maximum penalty of life imprisonment?

Decision

Guilty Plea Discount: Lerve DCJ acknowledged that the utilitarian value of the plea was limited by statute to a 5% discount, given it was entered on the day of trial. The court accepted that some utility existed because the complainant was not required to be cross-examined.

Seriousness of the Offending: The court characterised the offending as a serious example of conduct contemplated by s 66EA. The victim was as young as 11 or 12 when the offending began. The offender stood in a parental relationship to her and exploited that position to gain unsupervised access. He used grooming, coercive control, and sustained isolation over a period of approximately four years, with penile-vaginal intercourse occurring multiple times per week.

Objective Gravity and Maximum Penalty: Applying the principle in Makarian v The Queen (2005) 208 CLR 357, the court carefully considered the maximum penalty of life imprisonment as a yardstick. The court assessed the offending as above the mid-range of objective seriousness, having regard to the victim's very young age at commencement, the duration of the conduct, the frequency of the most serious acts, and the gross breach of trust involved.

Absence of Subjective Material: Because the offender tendered no subjective evidence, the court was left to sentence on the objective facts alone, without any material going to personal circumstances, remorse, rehabilitation prospects, or other mitigating factors. The resulting sentence reflects that absence.

Orders Made

  • The offender is convicted of the offence contrary to s 66EA(1) of the Crimes Act 1900.
  • Sentenced to a non-parole period of 12 years and 3 months, with a balance of term of 4 years, 10 months and 6 days.
  • Non-parole period commences 17 September 2025, expires 16 December 2037.
  • Balance of term commences 17 December 2037, expires 22 October 2042.
  • The court recommends release to parole at the expiration of the non-parole period.
  • The court recommends the offender be housed at Junee Correctional Centre if possible.
  • A Registrable Person Order is made under the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000, requiring registration on the NSW Child Protection Register for 15 years from the date of release from custody.
  • Reporting obligations apply throughout the registration period, including an initial report to police within five days of release, annual reporting, and notification of any changes to personal circumstances, travel, or contact with children.

Key Takeaways

  • A guilty plea entered on the first day of trial, after proceedings have commenced, attracts only a 5% discount for utilitarian value under NSW law, though the court may note additional utility where a complainant is spared cross-examination.
  • Where an offender tenders no subjective material at sentence, the court sentences on the objective facts alone, without the benefit of any mitigating personal circumstances, and the absence of such material can bear significantly on the outcome.
  • An unlawful sexual relationship maintained over approximately four years, commencing when the victim was as young as 11 or 12, involving hundreds of acts of intercourse, and sustained through coercive control and a gross breach of parental trust, was assessed as above the mid-range of objective seriousness under s 66EA.
  • The District Court applied the Makarian principle that the maximum penalty (here, life imprisonment) serves as a yardstick requiring the sentencing judge to compare the worst possible case against the case before the court.
  • Registration on the NSW Child Protection Register for 15 years post-release follows automatically as a registrable person order, with breach of reporting obligations carrying a maximum penalty of five years' imprisonment and/or a $50,000 fine.

Legislation and Cases Referenced

Legislation
- Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000
- Crimes Act , 1900
- Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

Cases
- Brown v R [2014] NSWCCA 215
- Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37
- Chamseddine v R [2017] NSWCCA 176
- Hili & Jones v The Queen [2010] HCA 45
- Makarian v The Queen (2005) 208 CLR 357
- MC v R [2017] NSWCCA 316
- R v Burchell (1987) 34 A Crim R 148
- R v Fisher [2024] NSWCCA 191
- R v Muldoon unrep. NSWCCA 13.12.1990
- R v Tuala [2015] NSWCCA 8
- R v TWP [2006] NSWCCA 141
- R v Van Ryn [2016] NSWCCA 1
- RA v R [2024] NSWVVA 149
- Ryan v The Queen (2001) 206 CLR 267
- Sampson v R [2025] NSWCCA 25
- ZBJ – see [2026] HCADisp 93
- ZBJ v R ( No. 2) [2025] NSWCCA 187
- Sampson v R [2025] NSWCCA 25